Thinking about health-related outcomes: what do we need evidence about?

Effectiveness of technology-based psychosocial interventions for improving health-related outcomes of family caregivers of stroke survivors: A systematic review and meta-analysis

AIM

To synthesize evidence regarding the effectiveness of technology-based psychosocial interventions in improving health-related outcomes among family caregivers of stroke survivors.

DESIGN

A systematic review and meta-analysis was reported by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines.

METHODS

Randomized controlled trials that investigated the effects of psychosocial interventions delivered through information and communication technologies on self-efficacy, caregiving competence, caregiver burden, perceived social support, anxiety, depression, health-related quality of life and cost-effectiveness were included. Two researchers independently selected studies, extracted data, and appraised the quality of the included studies. Subgroup analysis, sensitivity analysis, and narrative synthesis were conducted.

DATA SOURCES

Ten electronic databases (PubMed, CENTRAL, Web of Science, Scopus, CINHAL, Embase, Institution of Electrical Engineers Xplore, Ovid Medline, PsycINFO, ProQuest Dissertations and Thesis) were searched up to February 2023.

RESULTS

Nineteen studies involving 1717 participants fulfilled the eligibility criteria. Technology-based psychosocial interventions significantly improved self-efficacy (SMD = .62), caregiving competence (SMD = .55), depression (SMD = -.25) and anxiety (SMD = -.35). However, perceived social support, caregiver burden, and health-related quality of life did not show significant improvements. Subgroup analyses revealed that the interventions, lasting from 4 to 6 weeks and encompassing comprehensive contents, exhibited larger effect sizes. None of the studies measured cost-effectiveness.

CONCLUSION

The technology-based psychosocial interventions are effective in enhancing self-efficacy and caregiving competence, as well as alleviating anxiety, and depression among family caregivers of stroke survivors. Future research should investigate interventions delivered through various digital platforms using well-designed RCTs with in-depth qualitative data collection and measurement of health and cost-effectiveness outcomes.

IMPACT

Through psychosocial interventions, healthcare providers in clinical and community settings, particularly nurses, could incorporate technologies into current stroke care practices.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

It is not applicable as this is a systematic review.

REGISTRATION

The protocol was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42023402871).

Implementation strategies preferred by primary care clinicians to facilitate cancer prevention and control activities

Key clinical and community members need to be involved in the identification of feasible and impactful implementation strategies for translation of evidence-based interventions into practice. While a wide range of implementation strategies has been developed, there is little research on their applicability for cancer prevention and control (CPC) efforts in primary care. We conducted a survey of primary care physicians to identify implementation strategies they perceive as most feasible and impactful. The survey included both primary prevention behavior change counseling and cancer screening issues. Analyses contrasted ratings of feasibility and impact of nine implementation strategies, and among clinicians in different settings with a focus on comparisons between clinicians in rural vs. non-rural settings. We recruited a convenience sample of 326 respondents from a wide range of practice types from four practice-based research networks in 49 states and including 177 clinicians in rural settings. Ratings of impact were somewhat higher than those for feasibility. Few of the nine implementation strategies were high on both impact and feasibility. Only 'adapting to my practice' was rated higher than a 4 ("moderate") on both impact and feasibility. There were relatively few differences between rural and non-rural clinicians or associated with other clinician or setting characteristics. There is considerable variability in perceived impact and feasibility of implementation strategies for CPC activities among family medicine clinicians. It is important to assess both feasibility and impact of implementation strategies as well as their generalizability across settings. Our results suggest that optimal strategies to implement evidence-based CPC activities will likely need to be adapted for primary care settings. Future research is needed to replicate these findings and identify practical, implementation partner informed implementation strategies.

Stroke Rehabilitation: Recent Progress and Future Promise

Significant advancements in acute stroke medical management have changed stroke rehabilitation. In addition, an ever-changing health care ecosystem and heightened awareness of continued and new challenges requires that the occupational therapy profession consider new, innovative, and pragmatic approaches to measurement, intervention, and health services research, and clinical practice. The profession must elevate the focus and rigor of research examining occupation and participation after stroke, and their associations with health. Intervention research must progress beyond early phase pilot studies to a robust collection of meaningful large multisite studies that demonstrate the effectiveness of our interventions and the effectiveness of wide-scale implementation to ensure quality and consistent delivery of evidence-based practices in occupational therapy. These studies must address the accessibility of these practices for all people who have sustained stroke, and particularly those people who are most vulnerable to inaccessible stroke rehabilitation service delivery systems.

Walking the talk on multi-level interventions: The power of parsimony

There is strong consensus regarding the need for multi-level interventions (MLIs) to address today's complex health problems. Several longstanding social ecological frameworks are commonly referred to in guiding MLI development. The specificity and comprehensiveness of these frameworks unwittingly suggest that the totality of included influences are important in all health contexts. Not surprisingly, when viewed as requiring intervention at all levels of influence, MLIs are often considered to be infeasible due to sizeable cost and logistical barriers. Thus, efforts to develop and evaluate MLIs have been extremely limited, and comparatively few examples are found in the health literature. We argue that operational frameworks to identify which levels matter in which contexts - henceforth, referred to as parsimony - could accelerate the field towards broader use of MLIs. We suggest a hypothetical operational framework informed by complexity theory and pragmatic approaches that could enable us to conceptualize, design and evaluate MLIs to consider where reflexive and recursive process mechanisms that cross levels should be targeted by MLI. The approach also emphasizes sustainability of MLIs. Without developing parsimony-based operational frameworks to move us forward, we fear that little will change, and we will simply continue to talk, without proceeding to the walk.

Comparing, Contrasting, and Integrating Dissemination and Implementation Outcomes Included in the RE-AIM and Implementation Outcomes Frameworks

As the field of dissemination and implementation science matures, there are a myriad of outcomes, identified in numerous frameworks, that can be considered across individual, organizational, and population levels. This can lead to difficulty in summarizing literature, comparing across studies, and advancing translational science. This manuscript sought to (1) compare, contrast, and integrate the outcomes included in the RE-AIM and Implementation Outcomes Frameworks (IOF) and (2) expand RE-AIM indicators to include relevant IOF dissemination and implementation outcomes. Cross tabular comparisons were made between the constitutive definitions of each construct, across frameworks, to reconcile apparent discrepancies between approaches and to distinguish between implementation outcomes and implementation antecedents. A great deal of consistency was identified across approaches, including adoption (the intention, initial decision, or action to employ an evidence-based intervention), fidelity/implementation (the degree to which an intervention was delivered as intended), organizational maintenance/sustainability (extent to which a newly implemented treatment is maintained or institutionalized), and cost. The IOF construct of penetration was defined as a higher-order construct that may encompass the reach, adoption, and organizational maintenance outcomes within RE-AIM. Within the IOF approach acceptability, appropriateness, and feasibility did not match constitutive definitions of dissemination or implementation but rather reflected theoretical antecedents of implementation outcomes. Integration of the IOF approach across RE-AIM indicators was successfully achieved by expanding the operational definitions of RE-AIM to include antecedents to reach, adoption, implementation, and organizational maintenance. Additional combined metrics were also introduced including penetration, individual level utility, service provider utility, organizational utility, and systemic utility. The expanded RE-AIM indicators move beyond the current approaches described within both the RE-AIM framework and IOF and provides additional planning and evaluation targets that can contribute to the scientific field and increase the translation of evidence into practice.

A multistage mixed methods study protocol to evaluate the implementation and impact of a reconfiguration of acute medicine in Ireland's hospitals

BACKGROUND

To address deficits in the delivery of acute services in Ireland, the National Acute Medicine Programme (NAMP) was established in 2010 to optimise the management of acutely ill medical patients in the hospital setting, and to ensure their supported discharge to primary and community-based care. NAMP aims to reduce inappropriate hospital admissions, reduce length of hospital stay and ensure patients receive timely treatment in the most appropriate setting. It does so primarily via the development of Acute Medical Assessment Units (AMAUs) for the rapid assessment and management of medical patients presenting to hospitals, as well as streamlining the care of those admitted for further care. This study will examine the impact of this programme on patient care and identify the factors influencing its implementation and operation.

METHODS

We will use a multistage mixed methods evaluation with an explanatory sequential design. Firstly, we will develop a logic model to describe the programme's outcomes, its components and the mechanisms of change by which it expects to achieve these outcomes. Then we will assess implementation by measuring utilisation of the Units and comparing the organisational functions implemented to that recommended by the NAMP model of care. Using comparative case study research, we will identify the factors which have influenced the programme's implementation and its operation using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research to guide data collection and analysis. This will be followed by an estimation of the impact of the programme on reducing overnight emergency admissions for potentially avoidable medical conditions, and reducing length of hospital stay of acute medical patients. Lastly, data from each stage will be integrated to examine how the programme's outcomes can be explained by the level of implementation.

DISCUSSION

This formative evaluation will enable us to examine whether the NAMP is improving patient care and importantly draw conclusions on how it is doing so. It will identify the factors that contribute to how well the programme is being implemented in the real-world. Lessons learnt will be instrumental in sustaining this programme as well as planning, implementing, and assessing other transformative programmes, especially in the acute care setting.

Pragmatic dissemination and implementation research models, methods and measures and their relevance for nursing research

BACKGROUND

Pragmatic dissemination and implementation (D&I) research approaches can benefit patient care because they emphasize real-world settings and populations. Nurse scientists have an opportunity to reduce the gap between science and practice by using pragmatic D&I research and sustainability strategies.

PURPOSE

This article discusses pragmatic models, methods, and measures used in D&I research and their relevance for nursing research and enhancing population health.

METHODS

Summary of pragmatic D&I models and related methods for designing a pragmatic studies. We discuss the RE-AIM framework and the PRECIS-2 planning aid and figure in detail. A case study is provided and application to nursing research is discussed.

DISCUSSION

Successful translation of pragmatic D&I research demands an approach that addresses external validity, and customization at multiple levels including the patient, clinician, and setting. Context is critically important, and it is never too early to design for dissemination.

CONCLUSIONS

Pragmatic D&I approaches are needed to speed research translation, reduce avoidable waste of funding, improve clinical care, and enhance population health. Pragmatic D&I research is an area of tremendous opportunity for the nursing science community.

The relevance of public health research for practice: A 30-year perspective

The Nordic context where public health responsibility is strongly devolved to municipalities raises specific demands on public health research. The demands for causal inference of disease aetiology and intervention efficacy is not different, but in addition there is a need for population health science that describes local prevalence, distribution and clustering of determinants. Knowledge of what interventions and policies work, for whom and under what conditions is essential, but instead of assuming context independence and demanding high external validity it is important to understand how contextual factors linked to groups and places modify both effects and implementation. More implementation studies are needed, but the infrastructure for that research in terms of theories and instruments for monitoring implementation is needed. Much of this was true also 30 years ago, but with increasing spending on both public health research and practice, the demands are increasing that major improvement of population health and health equity are actually achieved.

Quantifying complexity in translational research: an integrated approach

PURPOSE

The purpose of this paper is to quantify complexity in translational research. The impact of major operational steps and technical requirements is calculated with respect to their ability to accelerate moving new discoveries into clinical practice.

DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH

A three-phase integrated quality function deployment (QFD) and analytic hierarchy process (AHP) method was used to quantify complexity in translational research. A case study in obesity was used to usability.

FINDINGS

Generally, the evidence generated was valuable for understanding various components in translational research. Particularly, the authors found that collaboration networks, multidisciplinary team capacity and community engagement are crucial for translating new discoveries into practice.

RESEARCH LIMITATIONS/IMPLICATIONS

As the method is mainly based on subjective opinion, some argue that the results may be biased. However, a consistency ratio is calculated and used as a guide to subjectivity. Alternatively, a larger sample may be incorporated to reduce bias.

PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS

The integrated QFD-AHP framework provides evidence that could be helpful to generate agreement, develop guidelines, allocate resources wisely, identify benchmarks and enhance collaboration among similar projects.

ORIGINALITY/VALUE

Current conceptual models in translational research provide little or no clue to assess complexity. The proposed method aimed to fill this gap. Additionally, the literature review includes various features that have not been explored in translational research.

Conducting rapid, relevant research: lessons learned from the My Own Health Report project

The lengthy and uncertain translation of research into clinical practice is well documented. Much of the current "gold standard" clinical research is slow, expensive, and lacks perceived relevance for practitioners and decision makers. In contrast, we summarize experiences conducting the My Own Health Report (MOHR) project to collect and address patient reported measures using principles of rapid, relevant pragmatic research. The methods used for rapid design and fielding of the MOHR project to improve attention to health behaviors and mental health are detailed. Within the multisite, pragmatic, implementation-focused MOHR study, we describe the four phases of the research and the key decisions made and actions taken within each. We provide concrete examples of how relevant research can be conducted transparently to rapidly provide information to practitioners. Data were collected and analyzed in 2013. The multisite (seven research centers partnered with 18 clinics) cluster randomized pragmatic delayed intervention trial was conducted in less than 18 months from receipt of funding applications to completion of data collection. Phases that were especially accelerated included funding and review, and recruitment and implementation. Conducting complex studies rapidly and efficiently is a realistic goal. Key lessons learned for prevention research include use of existing research networks; use of web-based assessment/feedback tools that are tailored to fit local needs; engaging relevant stakeholders early on and throughout the process to minimize need for redesign; and making pragmatic decisions that balance internal and external validity concerns rather than waiting for perfect solutions.